ArticleIntestinal research2025
Patient preferences for advanced therapies in ulcerative colitis using conjoint analysis.
Article in Intestinal research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsSelecting an optimal advanced therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC) is difficult because of the increasing number of available therapies. This study assessed UC patients' preferences for drug profiles in decision-making regarding advanced therapies using conjoint analysis.
methodsA web-based survey was conducted from October to November 2023 in patients with UC aged ≥ 18 years with prior oral 5-aminosalicylic acid treatment (UMIN000052327). We quantified the importance of drug attributes (location of administration, route/frequency of administration, speed of onset-of-action, maintenancesustainability, risk of serious adverse events within 1 year, and novelty of the drug) and the part-worth utility of attribute levels in mild and severe symptom scenarios, including among employed versus unemployed patients.
resultsOf 372 patients who completed the survey, 365 were evaluated. Patient preferences were generally highly individualized. The route/frequency of administration was the most important attribute in both the mild and severe symptom scenarios. Oral administration was preferred in the mild symptom scenario, whereas no specific preference was observed in the severe symptom scenario. The route/ frequency of administration was more valued in the mild symptom scenario than in the severe one, whereas speed of onset of action was more valued in the severe symptom scenario. No significant difference was found in the preference for drug profiles between employed and unemployed patients.
conclusionsPatient preferences for the route/frequency of administration, as well as other drug profiles, change with disease severity but demonstrate substantial interindividual variability. Therefore, shared decision-making is important to incorporate patients' perspectives into the selection of advanced therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.